In the usual argumentative writing, some students just put forward their own views and find a few examples to prove it. In order to make up the number of words, some students actually let the examples take up a lot of space, causing confusion in style. Although this kind of argumentative paper with "views and examples" also shows its own views and has sufficient examples to prove it, it is difficult to convince people because it fails to explain it in reason. This kind of argumentative paper always gives people a superficial and superficial feeling, which is hard to believe. If you want to explain your point of view more fully, it is not enough to just list examples, but also to reason on the basis of facts, so as to link the materials with your point of view.
When reasoning and doing analysis, there are often some disadvantages, such as talking too much and looking at problems statically and unilaterally. In order to let students better talk about their views through dialectical analysis, I will focus on how to use dialectical analysis in argumentative writing.
First, dialectical analysis should grasp the discretion. In the process of reasoning and analysis, sometimes the reasoning is too extreme, and the analysis has entered a dead end. "Too much is not enough", once exaggerated, not only can not highlight the argument, but will dilute the argument and have the opposite effect. When reasoning and doing analysis, we should understand the essence and internal relations of things and grasp the discretion of analysis and judgment. Writing an article is like talking. In order to make your words easy to be accepted by others, you often make some supplementary explanations. These supplementary explanation components are often the components of reasoning analysis. If you overemphasize it, it will cause others' disgust. If the supplement is not in place, it will not be recognized by others. Therefore, it is particularly important to grasp the right measure and get it right. As the saying goes: "There are three words, and it is better to say it skillfully." The same point of view can be well expressed as long as it is well measured and properly analyzed dialectically.
Second, dialectical analysis should be comprehensive. When reasoning and making analysis, we should be able to focus on our own views, proceed from the reality of objective things, comprehensively consider and rationally analyze and demonstrate. Only by standing in an objective and fair position and abandoning personal selfishness can the truth be reasonable and the analysis be accurate and thorough. If we do not proceed from the overall situation, only pay attention to one side of things, but not to the other side of things, and pay attention to one factor while ignoring other factors, it will be difficult to convince people. Or when talking about problems, only consider your own interests, and try to make your own opinions beneficial to you, without considering the interests of others. This is untenable and can only be a fallacy. This one-sided statement is naturally not very convincing.
Third, dialectical analysis should be forward-looking. There is nothing immutable in the world, so we should look at things and analyze problems with a linked and developing perspective. We should be able to understand the nature and laws of things and not be confused by the illusion in front of us. Just like the "ugly duckling", he was very inconspicuous when he was a child. When it is mixed with ducks, it is not even as good as ducklings. Not looked down upon, often discriminated against. This humble appearance has deceived many people. But it is not a duck after all, it is a goose in essence, and then it flies and soars in the blue sky. If we can't understand its essence and only look at it with a static and isolated eye, we can only make a wrong judgment, and we can only regard the white swan with lofty aspirations and soaring in the blue sky as an ugly duckling that will never fly out of the courtyard wall.
Learning to do some dialectical analysis in argument can make the argument of argumentative paper more prominent and the argument more rigorous. Correspondingly, it will also make the argumentative paper more convincing.